Judicial Review—Is not against the decision. It is against the decision making process.Only on the grounds of mala fide, arbitrariness and perversity.
 2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 2833 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice  H.K. Sema The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta Civil Appeal No.298 of…
Common Intention–Only be inferred from the circumstances appearing from the proved facts of the case and the proved circumstances. Common Intention–The acts may be different in character, but must have been actuated by one and the same common intention in order to attract the provision.
 2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 2829 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (VACATION BENCH) Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.K. Jain Criminal Appeal No.…
Transfer petition—The crucial question is whether any part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court.
2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 2826 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia Civil Appeal No. 4110 of 2007…
Dishonour of cheque—Territorial jurisdiction of Court to entertain complaint—Issue of statutory notice cannot constitute a valid ground for conferring jurisdiction upon Court concerned to take cognizance of offence under Section 138—Issue of statutory notice demanding payment of cheque amount is not sufficient to vest Delhi Courts with jurisdiction to entertain complaint
(2014) 3 BC 695 : (2014) 9 SCALE 134 : (2014) 8 SCC 878 : (2014) 3 BC 695 : (2014) 3 CCR 547 : (2014) 4 RCR(Civil) 243…
Concurrent findings that even in the absence of seal a conclusion has to be drawn that the licence had been issued by him on behalf of Mandal Panchayat and not on behalf of Municipal Council and therefore it was valid licence. Therefore, High Court wrongly held that licence was bad.
AIR 2001 SC 2695 : (2001) 4 JT 367 : (2001) 10 SCC 742 : (2001) AIRSCW 2500 : (2001) 4 Supreme 532 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA PADIKAL MADAPPA…
Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 – Section 8(1)(a) – Sale of properties – Properties acquired under 1952 Act alongwith other properties – Concurrent finding recorded by Single Bench and Division Bench upholding validity of notification – Under the 1952 Act, fair market value had to be determined on the date of acquisition
AIR 2007 SC 357 : (2006) 3 ARBLR 414 : (2006) 8 JT 434 : (2006) 8 SCALE 768 : (2006) 10 SCC 227 : (2006) 5 SCR 696…
Uttar Pradesh Electricity Reforms Act, 1999 – Section – 23, 23(1) – Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board (Employees Retirement) Regulations, 1975 – Section – 2(a) – Age of retirement –
(2006) 111 FLR 336 : (2006) 9 SCALE 79 : (2006) 7 SCC 660 : (2006) SCC(L&S) 1723 : (2006) 6 SCR 793 Supp : (2007) 2 SLJ 207…
Deceased executed will in favour of wife in respect of all his properties – She became owner of properties and after her death, her nephews would be owner of properties in equal shares – First appellate Court hold that wife was not competent to gift properties in favour of Gurdwara – After her death life estate ceased and plaintiffs would be entitled to recover possession and not entitled to mesne profits – Suit filed by plaintiffs decreed for recovery of possession.
AIR 2006 SC 3282 : (2006) 4 CTC 773 : (2006) 8 JT 525 : (2006) 9 SCALE 83 : (2006) 8 SCC 75 : (2006) 5 SCR 799…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 304 – Injury on accused – Explanation – Injuries appearing to be minor need not be explained by prosecution
AIR 2006 SC 3406 : (2006) CriLJ 4776 : (2006) 10 SCALE 512 : (2006) 10 SCC 635 : (2006) 8 SCR 908 Supp : (2006) AIRSCW 5329 :…
Delay in lodging of FIR was bound to occur as the FIR was filed after return of prosecutrix from Jaipur after one and a half years remaining under the ordain of accused/appellant – She had been forced to indulge in prostitution during this period – Prosecutrix had become habitual to sexual intercourse – In such a fact-situation, question of having any physical injury marks would not arise – Offences punishable under Section 366 and 376 proved beyond reasonable doubt – Appeal dismissed.
AIR 2009 SC 2729 : (2009) CriLJ 3942 : (2009) 7 JT 491 : (2009) 8 SCALE 801 : (2009) 15 SCC 543 : (2009) AIRSCW 4182 SUPREME COURT…